Partygate hearing to be considered by High Court tomorrow

From reddit.com

 

 

 From Good Law Project

A legal challenge against the Metropolitan Police’s investigation into Boris Johnson’s attendance at lockdown parties could be given permission to proceed in a High Court hearing tomorrow (Wednesday 22nd February). The action is being brought by Good Law Project and a former Deputy Assistant Commissioner of the Metropolitan Police, Lord Paddick.

Boris Johnson was issued with a £50 Fixed Penalty Notice (FPN), after the Met Police’s probe concluded that he had unlawfully attended a birthday party thrown in his honour at Downing Street during the first lockdown. 

But this case focuses on the Met Police’s failure to even send questionnaires - their primary method of investigating Partygate events - to former Prime Minister, Boris Johnson, regarding two other lockdown gatherings that he attended in November and December 2020. A number of civil servants and officials who took part in these events were sent questionnaires and ultimately fined.

In pre-action correspondence, the Met failed to explain why Mr Johnson was not sent the questionnaires, or how they concluded that his attendance - unlike that of other attendees - was lawful.

The High Court has ordered a permission hearing to determine if a judicial review into the police investigation can go ahead. A ruling could be made on the same day.

This is the second time that Good Law Project has taken legal action against the Metropolitan Police over Partygate. In January 2021, the Met did a u-turn on its initial decision not to investigate the parties held in No 10 Downing Street and Whitehall, after Good Law Project issued legal proceedings.

Jo Maugham, Director of Good Law Project, said:
 

We can't understand - and the Met won't disclose - how Boris Johnson dodged fines for going to parties that junior civil servants were fined for attending. But what it looks like is special treatment for the powerful.

I don't care about Johnson. And nor do I care about £100 fines. What I do care about is the rule of law. It must apply without fear or favour - or everything will fall into the sea.

Former Deputy Assistant Commissioner of the Metropolitan Police, Lord Paddick, said:
 

My sole motivation is to ensure everyone is treated fairly and equally under the law as a result of the police carrying out their duty without fear or favour.  Many fined for breaching lockdown rules will find this difficult to believe without further explanation from the Metropolitan Police.

Dawn Butler's 'Liar' speech in full

 Via They Work for You

The last 18 months have been a tale of the good, the bad and the ugly.

The good is that the people of Brent and elsewhere have joined together to form mutual aid groups, religions have come together to find common ground, and strangers are now firm friends. The bad is this Government’s catastrophic handling of the pandemic, the mixed messages, the corruption in plain sight, the authoritarian laws and the erosion of our democracy. And the ugly is that racism in society has reared its ugly head, spurred on by Government reports and the hyping up of the culture war and the war on woke.

While the NHS was coping with 130,000 people dying from the pandemic, the Prime Minister was making his mates rich. Cronyism is rife and old chums are given jobs regardless of their skillset—some a little bit on the side. This has been one big experiment for this corrupt, authoritarian, racism-laden Government, and I am not scared of saying it like it is.

The Government said we need to talk about class, so let us do it. Let us call out this toxic elitism once and for all. Byline Times, the Good Law Project, Novara Media, openDemocracy, Amnesty and Liberty have all exposed the Government, and the Government’s response is to spend public money defending the indefensible.

It is funny how there is no money for NHS staff, yet £1 billion of covid contracts have been awarded to Conservative donors. We were told that Ministers were not involved, but then the Good Law Project exposed emails from the Prime Minister’s advisers and the Home Secretary lobbying for money. The corrupt, authoritarian approach of this Government would be condemned and investigated if it were happening anywhere else in the world.

The 1% believe they owe nothing to society. They do not believe in the NHS, and they do not support it. This week I spoke to Orwell Foundation youth writer Manal Nadeem. She wrote:

“Let anti-racism be both common logic and law. May we have more accountability than apologies. May performative, placeholder posts be followed by policy… When the future arrives, let the minimum wage be a liveable wage… Let survival be a birthright... When the poor cannot pay with anything else, let us not ask them to pay with their lives.”

Poor people in our country have paid with their lives because the Prime Minister spent the last 18 months misleading this House and the country.

Peter Stefanovic from the Communication Workers Union has a video with more than 27 million views online. In it he highlights that the Prime Minister says: that the economy has grown by 73%—it is just not true; that he has reinstated nursing bursaries—just not true; that there is not a covid app working anywhere in the world—just not true; and that the Tories invested £34 billion in the NHS—not true. The Prime Minister said

“we have severed the link between infection and serious disease and death.”

Not only is that not true but it is dangerous.

It is dangerous to lie during a pandemic, and I am disappointed that the Prime Minister has not come to the House to correct the record and correct the fact that he has lied to this House and the country over and over again.

Formidable group of unions and education organisations issue joint statement ahead of PM's statement on wider re-opening of schools

Nine education organisations have joined together to issue a statement on the wider opening of schools and colleges in England. This statement is issued ahead of the Prime Minister’s expected announcement on Monday. The signatories are the Association of School and College Leaders (ASCL), GMB, National Association of Head Teachers (NAHT), NASUWT, National Education Union (NEU), National Governance Association (NGA), Sixth Form Colleges Association (SFCA), Unison, and Unite.

 

STATEMENT

 

We are committed to bringing all children and young people back into the classroom as soon as possible. However, it is counterproductive if there is a danger of causing another surge in the virus, and the potential for a further period of lockdown. Wider opening must be safe and sustainable.

 

We therefore urge the Prime Minister to commit to 8 March only if the scientific evidence is absolutely clear that this is safe, and at that point go no further than a phased return of children and young people with sufficient time to assess the impact before moving to the next phase.

 

We are increasingly concerned that the government is minded to order a full return of all pupils on Monday 8 March in England.

 

This would seem a reckless course of action. It could trigger another spike in Covid infections, prolong the disruption of education, and risk throwing away the hard-won progress made in suppressing the virus over the course of the latest lockdown.

 

The science around the role that schools play in the overall rate of transmission is uncertain. Scientists have expressed different views on this point. What we do know is that the full reopening of schools will bring nearly 10 million pupils and staff into circulation in England – close to one fifth of the population. This is not a small easing of lockdown restrictions. It is a massive step.

 

These factors necessitate a cautious approach with wider school and college opening phased over a period of time. This is the approach being taken in Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland. It allows public health experts to assess the impact of the first phase before moving to the next.

 

None of this is intended to stand in the way of the full reopening of schools and colleges. On the contrary. It is intended as a prudent way forward to ensure that once they are fully open, they stay open.

Developers' free for all: Stop Dominic Cummings Stripping Away Our Rights - Sign the petition

If you think developers are getting away with murder in Brent at the moment - you ain't seen nothing yet if these proposals go through.

This petition has been launched  recoognising the damage that will be done to our urban environment if planning controls are limited even more.

THE PETITION - SIGN HERE

TO: Boris Johnson 

Please don’t strip back the right of communities to a say on what gets built in their area. Letting property developers do whatever they want will lead to badly designed and poorly located housing. We need smarter solutions to the housing crisis

EXPLANATION

 

Wave goodbye to your right to a say in what’s built in your local area -- if Dominic Cummings gets his way. We’ve got just weeks to stop him.

He's working on a plan to rip up the rules for new buildings in England -- and replace it with a US style scheme. It could fill neighbourhoods with shoddy flats and ugly office buildings.

But Cummings’ plan won’t affect every community the same way. City streets, not the countryside, will be the focus -- so people of colour will be far worse affected.

Cummings is trying to sneak this plan through as part of a coronavirus recovery programme -- and Boris Johnson just announced the first of the changes.

The full outrageous plans will be published within weeks. If no one seems to care, these changes will become law before we know it.

Dominic Cummings’ reckless US-style plan would take power over your local area away from expert planners with extensive local knowledge -- and give it to giant new “development corporations”. 

Remember, this is the same government who brought in a planning loophole that has allowed developers to build new flats without windows. Too many people are already trapped in poor quality housing.

But more than a million homes given planning permission in the last 10 years haven’t been built. So ripping up England’s planning rules to give power to profit hungry developers won’t fix things.

We need to build a huge public backlash right now-- can you add your name today?

 

'It feels almost like prison': the developers building homes with no natural light
The Guardian. 19 December 2019.

England’s planning system set for shake-up
Financial Times (paywall). 10 June 2020.

Boris Johnson heralds biggest reform of planning laws since the war
The Times (paywall). 30 June 2020.

Let’s not diminish our places in the name of ‘economic stimulus’
Local Government Chronicle. 9 June 2020.

Brent may see more offices converted into housing after Government announcement

After Boris Johnosn's announcement this afternoon it seems likely that Brent will see more office buildings converted into homes as well as more freedom for developers in general. Offices may no longer be in demand as working from home continues and the office overheads are shifted to the home worker to the benefit of the employer. On the plus sides the reduction in commuting will reduce air pollution and traffic congestion.

Conversion of office into homes has recently been opposed by some Brent Council members as the resultant accommodation is often of poor quality, and pre-Covid, it meant a reduction in local job opportunities.  The most prominent Brent  conversion has been 1 Olympic Way.

This is how the BBC reported the proposals that will take effect in September.

Under what Mr Johnson dubbed "project speed," planning laws would also be streamlined to encourage building.

Changes, planned for September, include:

• A wider range of commercial buildings will be allowed to change to residential use without the need for a planning application

• Builders will not need a normal planning application to demolish and rebuild vacant and redundant residential and commercial buildings, if they are rebuilt as homes

• Homeowners will be able to build additional space above their properties "via a fast track approval process" and subject to neighbour consultation

Slipped into the announcement what amounts to a reduction of money for affordable housing that in the Budget was announced as £12bn over 5 years but will now be over 12 years.

NEU survey finds 92% of members would not feel safe under PM's proposals for schools reopening

From the NEU

Within one hour 49,000 members of the National Education Union (NEU) responded to a survey about the Government's announcement tonight. They have given  a resounding NO to the Prime Ministers's roadmap for wider school reopening.

85 per cent of respondents said they disagreed with Boris Johnson's plans to restart lessons for reception, year 1 and year 6 from 1 June.

92 per cent said they would not feel safe with the proposed wider opening of schools.

Of those with school age children, 89 per cent said they felt it would be unsafe or very unsafe to send their children back to school. 

Of those respondents working from home because they have a pre-existing medical condition or are pregnant, 96 per cent said they felt unsafe or very unsafe returning to work. And 96 per cent of those with a family member living with them who has a pre-existing medical condition or are pregnant thought it would be unsafe or very unsafe for them to return. 

92% said the Government must meet the NEU's five tests before schools can re-open.

Dr Mary Bousted, NEU joint general secretary, of the National Education Union said: 

The Government must work with the unions to establish a position which gains the confidence of staff in schools. Tonight's announcement – so out of step with Scotland and Wales and with its confusion about social distancing – has resulted in 92 per cent of NEU members saying they currently feel a wider opening of schools would be unsafe 

The Prime Minister describes this as a ''first sketch'' of a roadmap but our members think this sketch must urgently be re-drawn. 

The incoherence in this plan has generated genuine fear. For school leaders, the lack of clarity about what is expected before, or on 1 June, is simply unacceptable.

Kevin Courtney NEU on Sky News LINK

 

Greens: Outcry from workers proves Government proposals not consulted upon or thought through

Responding to Boris Johnson’s public address this evening Sian Berry, co-leader of the Green Paarty  said:

We were told we were going to get a roadmap for the way forward today but the Prime Minster’s address was ambiguous and confusing. The shift to ‘Stay Alert’ from ‘Stay Home’ as a key message, offers absolutely no clarity and leaves people wondering what exactly it is they’re being asked to do.

We said on Thursday and we maintain this evening, that while we understand and share the anxiety to get the economy moving and for people to see their loved ones, easing lock down too soon,which we strongly believe it still is, could lead to unnecessary deaths, a second peak and the overwhelming of the NHS.

The 'world beating test, track and trace scheme’ which Boris Johnson referred to, must be a community shield which we’ve been advocating for, for weeks.

The immediate outcry from key unions in the industries affected demonstrates that the implications for worker safety have not been either consulted or properly thought through.

We are pleased to see the Government finally acknowledging the severity of the situation in care homes and now have expectations of immediate action to provide a clear plan for quarantining and routine testing of staff and residents.

Staying at home will continue to save lives and protect the NHS so that’s the advice, until there’s more clarity on what the Government is actually trying to say, that we should be following.

CBI's cautious reaction to PM's speech on lockdown plans

The CBI has responded to the Prime Minister’s address on the continuing Covid-19 crisis and the status of lockdown measures.

Dame Carolyn Fairbairn, CBI Director General, said:

“Today marks the first glimmer of light for our faltering economy. A phased and careful return to work is the only way to protect jobs and pay for future public services. The Prime Minister has set out the first steps for how this can happen. 

“Businesses are keen to open and get our economy back on its feet. But they also know putting health first is the only sustainable route to economic recovery. The message of continued vigilance is right.  

“This announcement marks the start of a long process. While stopping work was necessarily fast and immediate, restarting will be slower and more complex. It must go hand-in-hand with plans for schools, transport, testing and access to PPE. Firms will want to see a roadmap, with dates they can plan for. 

“Success will rest on flexibility within a framework: clear guidance which firms can adapt for their particular circumstances. Financial support will also need to evolve for sectors moving at different speeds – some remaining in hibernation, while others get ready to open safely. 

“The coming weeks should see business, government and employee representatives working together as part of a national effort built on openness and trust. This is the only way to revive the UK economy and protect both lives and livelihoods.”

NEU calls for clarity on Government's school re-opening plans - Letter to Boris Johnson

From the National Education Union

Letter to Prime Minister calling for end to unhelpful speculation on school and colleges reopening.

In the light of unhelpful speculation on the further opening of schools and colleges the joint General Secretaries of the National Education Union are calling on the Prime minister for clarity on how Government will make such a decision.

Given that a full return to the school population will increase risks to our members and the children in their care the NEU is asking for the modelling, evidence and plans that will form the basis of any decisions made by the Prime Minister and his Government to be shared.

Dear Prime Minister,

We are writing to you on behalf of the members of the National Education Union. First, let us say that we wish you all the best in your personal recovery from the virus.

Our members are hard at work, supporting the children of key workers and vulnerable children who are still attending schools. They are helping efforts to support vulnerable children at home. They are doing their best to support children’s learning in these unusual circumstances.

We are pleased that you, other ministers and Chief Nursing Officer have acknowledged their efforts in helping NHS staff to be at work.

Our members are disturbed, however, by increasing media speculation that schools will soon be re-opened. We consider this speculation to be most unhelpful: it may undermine people’s resolve to stick to social isolation. We are disturbed that it is seemingly being stimulated by unnamed Government ministers.

Given that an early return to full school populations will mean an increased risk to our members and the children in their care, we are writing to ask you to share your modelling, evidence and plans.
As a matter of urgency, and certainly well before any proposal to re-open schools is published, please can you share with our members:

· your modelling of the increased number of cases and mortalities among children, their parents, carers and extended families, and their teachers and support staff, as a result of the re-opening of schools.
· whether such modelling is based on some notion that social distancing could be implemented in schools. (We ask this because our members think it would be a foolhardy assumption.)
· whether your modelling would be based on concrete plans to establish regular testing of children and staff, availability of appropriate PPE and enhanced levels of cleaning - with all of which we are currently experiencing severe difficulties.
· whether your modelling would include plans for children and staff who are in vulnerable health categories, or who are living with people in vulnerable health categories, not to be in attendance at school or college?
· your latest evidence concerning the groups of people who are most vulnerable to death or life-changing consequences as a result of the virus, for example the evidence of the impact on those who live in crowded accommodation, those with different comorbidities, those from different ethnic groups and of different ages and sexes.
· whether the Scottish Parliament, the devolved assemblies in Wales and Northern Ireland and our neighbours in the government of the Republic of Ireland agree with your plans.

Further, given that in re-opening schools and colleges, you would be asking our members to take an increased risk, we believe they have a right to understand fully how any such proposal belongs within an overall Government strategy to defeat the virus.

In this context, please could you give the firmest of indications:

· whether you are developing plans for extensive testing, contact tracing and quarantine in society as a whole? Our members see that countries successfully implementing such strategies have many fewer cases and many, many fewer mortalities than we do in the UK.
· if you are developing such plans, how long it will take to put them in place and how low the number of virus cases needs to be before such a strategy can be successful?
· whether you intend these plans be in place well before schools are re-opened. (This seems essential to us.)
· if you are not developing such plans, what is your overall approach and is it dependent on an assumption that those who have had the virus are subsequently immune?
· of your assessment of the strategies in place in South Korea, where there is a clear policy of testing, contact tracing and continued school closures?

We have written to you as representatives of staff who in the event of schools re-opening would be asked to accept an increased risk for themselves and the children they teach.

You will appreciate that our attitude to the issue of reopening is dependent on the answers to the questions above.

Again, we wish you well in your recovery and in your efforts to bring our country through this crisis.

We restate our willingness to work with you on finding solutions to the problems posed by the current situation.

We look forward to your urgent reply.


Yours sincerely

Mary Bousted Kevin Courtney
Joint General Secretaries

Joint General Secretary

'The United States and Britain – a dangerously special relationship' Meeting Monday May 8th

From Brent Stop the War

British Foreign Secretary, Boris Johnson was recently told not to go to Russia by Donald Trump: even the normally pro-government Economist was enraged by this humiliation LINK.

Everyone can see that British Government foreign policy is being decided by a volatile and reckless Trump administration with untold consequences for the whole world. 

Speaker:  Stephen Bell, former head of policy at the Communication Workers Union and Treasurer of Stop the War

 Monday, May the 8^th at 7.30pm

 Brent Trades Hall (London Apollo Club) 375 High Rd, Willesden, NW10 2JR

[Close to Willesden Bus Garage, buses 6,52,98,226,260,266,302,460, and just five minutes’ walk from Dollis Hill Jubilee Line station]

Is Brent Council using Sadiq's or Boris's definition of 'affordable' homes

Brent Planning Committee at its meeting on April 26th will be hearing two pre-application presentations from Quintain and making a decision on two planning applications from them. All contain references to 'affordable' housing.

Over the weekend my attention was caught by a tweet from Sadiq Khan, the London Mayor, publicising his draft affordable housing and viability supplementary planning guidance (November 2016 LINK)

As I have long had a gripe with Brent Planning Officers over their failure to explain what they mean by 'affordable' housing in their reports to Planning Committee (usually 80% of market ents which are not affordable for local residents) I thought it was worth looking at what the Mayor had to say.

The supplementary guidance states:

The Mayor strongly encourages LPAs (local Planning Authorities) to apply the affordable housing threshold approach to applications for sites which are capable of delivering ten or more units. In addition, when developing future affordable housing policy (and other policies on planning obligations and CIL levels) LPAs are strongly encouraged to take account of this Supplementary Planning Guidance (SPG) and the importance the Mayor places on increasing the numbers of affordable homes

Central to this is the London Living Rent capped at one-third of the median gross household income for the borough:

Definition of London Living Rent

London Living Rent is a new type of intermediate affordable housing that will help, through low rents on time-limited tenancies, households with around average earnings save for a deposit to buy their own home. Eligibility for London Living Rent is restricted to existing tenants with a maximum household income of £60,000, without sufficient current savings to purchase a home in the local area.

It is aimed at single people, couples and other households with more than one person, but is unlikely to be suitable for house shares of multiple adults due to the household income limit. Any update to this criteria will be provided through the GLA’s annual monitoring reports. The GLA has calculated ward-level caps for London Living Rent homes based on one-third of median gross household income for the local borough.  

The cap varies from the Borough median by up to 20 per cent in line with house prices within the ward. The caps have further variation based on the number of bedrooms within the home. Registered Providers (RPs) have the flexibility to let homes at lower rents if they wish. 

RPs are expected to actively encourage London Living Rent tenants into home ownership. They will be expected to assess the ability and inclination to save of prospective tenants and, where part of mixed-tenure schemes, offer tenants
the right to purchase their London Living Rent home on a shared ownership basis.  Further information on this product is available in Homes for Londoners: Affordable Housing Programme 2016-2021. As set out in the current annual monitoring report, for intermediate dwellings
 to be considered affordable, annual housing costs, including mortgage (assuming reasonable interest rates and deposit requirements), rent and service charges should be no greater than 40% of net household income.(My emphasis)

Importantly in the light of Quintain's entry into the Build to Rent market the guidance says these should 'preferably' be at London Living Rent levels:

Affordable housing tenure: the pathway recognises the need for all homes on the Build to Rent development to stay under single management and as such will encourage affordable homes on the development to be delivered as discounted market rent (preferably at London Living Rent levels), managed by the Build to Rent provider (or possibly via another designated manager). 

At the very least Planning Committee members should establish with officers whether they are using Sadiq Khan's definition of 'affordable' based on the median borough income or Boris Johnson's 80% of market rent.


 

Brent Council steps up action on air quality

When Mayor Boris Johnson concealed London's air pollution crisis as much as he could so Sadiq Khan deserves praise for bringing the issue out into the open, with Green AM Caroline Russell providing much of the pressure. Last week's alerts to Londoners demonstrate the seriousness of the issue.

Brent Council's Cabinet is due to approve the Council's own Air Quality Action Plan for consultation. The Action Plan opens with a declaration:

Brent council acknowledges the impact of poor air quality on health and the need for action to reduce or eliminate air pollution where possible. In Brent it is estimated that 200 premature deaths occur each year which are directly attributable to air pollution as well as further unquantified premature deaths where air quality is a factor. We accept air quality in Brent is poor and recognise significant intervention is required to improve local air quality for all. We have made some progress but accept that further work is needed to meet this challenge. Our air quality action plan demonstrates we are taking this issue seriously and will endeavour to tackle air pollution at source or reduce exposure where this is not possible. 

We will demonstrate our leadership by exploring options for low emission neighbourhoods, promotion of low emission vehicles and fuels where possible, reduce pollutant emissions from our buildings and vehicles and develop meaningful partnerships with others to get the most out of our air quality action measures.

We recognise air pollution as a shared problem and everyone must play their part to commit to continue to work with our communities to achieve air quality improvement. As we understand more about air pollution and the impact on health, we want to empower our residents to make informed choices about their options for travel and participate in decisions about air quality in the areas they live and work in. We must commit to safeguarding those at highest risk to provide additional information and limit or prohibit the development of areas where air quality is likely to be made worse. 

Not all air quality improvements can be delivered directly by our actions and so we will develop partnerships with other Local Authorities, the London Mayor, and other agencies where appropriate to maximise resources where we can and realise wider air quality benefits from our actions. 

We will commit to keeping this air quality action plan under review and will continue to identify new opportunities for air quality action in response to changes in legislation or local air quality as the need arises.

Our ultimate aim is to secure clean air for all especially for those at greatest risk or in the worst affected areas in the borough. We accept that this is likely to be a challenge to fulfil, but commit to investing in air quality action for improvement now and in the future. .

Brent's current Air Quality Management Area

The Action Plan acknowledges the impact of poor air quality on different sections of Brent's population:

...some areas of the Borough are more likely to be affected by poor air quality than others as the wider problems of poverty; deprivation and general poor health make people more vulnerable to the effects of pollution. This contributes to an almost 9-year difference in life expectancy between the most affluent and least affluent wards in the Borough. The council is committed to reducing this gap.

Four Air Quality Action Areas are proposed:

0. The revised action plan includes the creation of four Air Quality Action Areas (AQAA) or hotspots, as Neasden town centre, Church End, the Kilburn Regeneration Area, and Wembley and Tokyngton. These areas were selected based on traffic volumes and levels of traffic emissions, and have been identified as areas of planned development and aligned with the priority areas identified in the current Borough Plan. Brent will develop strategic policies and localised focussed air quality measures in these areas. 
   
   

They will:

·      provide extra assistance and support to ensure that all schools within the AQAAs have and use school travel plans, reducing vehicle use associated with schools, regularly reviewing targets for reducing air pollution and establishing programmes for raising awareness; 


·       provide assistance and support to businesses within the AQAAs with large fleets to have and utilise travel plans. The council and businesses will agree targets for emission reductions; 


·      Identify possible Low Emission Neighbourhoods in each AQAA and draft implementation plans for areas within each; 


·      Consider these sites within these areas as highest priority for public realm improvements (such as additional green infrastructure) especially where there are 
 those at highest risk or the most susceptible are located such as schools, residential properties and hospitals 

·       to educate and raise awareness about local air quality; - working with communities and public health professionals to protect and inform the most vulnerable 

The Plan lists detailed action points for each of these areas:

• Emissions from new developments and buildings
• Public health and community engagement
• Delivery servicing and freight
• Exposure reduction measures
• Cleaner transpor

See the full action points in Appendix 1 below:

 

Click bottom right to enlarge.

Boris Johnson praises Michaela Free School: 'rote learning, discipline and memorising'

Tory propaganda: celebrating free school's 'achievements' before it opens...

Anyone who doubted that free schools are a Conservative political project should be convinced by the public relations offensive launched by prominent Conservative politicians.

The latest was a reception in the House of Lords hosted by Schools minister Lord Nash for free schools due to open in September. The Kilburn Times LINK reported:

It is yet to open but the achievements of a new free school in Kilburn has been celebrated in the House of Lords.

What a fantastic new concept - celebrating achievements before they happen! Parents of as yet unborn children can throw parties to celebrate their child's first steps and football clubs can tour their cities on open top buses to celebrate their league achievements before the season opens.

Of course we have been here before with the Michaela Academy free school declaring itself  'Exceptional' on a massive, illegal billboard outside its Wembley Park building before most staff had been appointed, children recruited or any lesson had taken place.

This was followed up by Boris Johnson, a few months after the school had opened, declaring on a visit in his usual understated way that 'this is one of the most extraordinary schools I've seen' comparing it to Eton and hailing Michael Gove's darling Katharine Birbalsingh as a “powerful and visionary head teacher”.

On Twitter @Mapesbury commented:

Surely that Gladstone free school deserves a celebration more for having 120 pupils but no school! That's a mean feat.

By the way, Gladstone is also 'Exceptional' before it opens or teaches anyone and Kilburn Grange Free School still has vacant places for its reception class in September.

Now I'm off to organise a celebration of the Green Party's 2020 General Election victory hosted by Baroness Jones in the House of Lords to take place in September.